110833821
I would never have guessed it, but I recently became a member of THE ESTABLISHMENT. Pretty scary stuff, right? You just mention the words THE ESTABLISHMENT, and you immediately become the enemy of Bernie Sanders. How did I become a member of THE ESTABLISHMENT?
The criteria are pretty simple – longevity is one of them. I have written this column for 51 years plus. That’s the kind of longevity some columnists have died trying to make. If the political outliers were honest with themselves, they would admit that everyone strives for longevity in the workforce since it equals a paycheck.
The Bern seems to believe that if you have never lived on the edges of poverty, you’re part of THE ESTABLISHMENT. Sanders does leave you an out. If you’re pro-Sanders, you can never be part of THE ESTABLISHMENT. Unfortunately for Planned Parenthood and some other long-standing Democratic organizations vowing support for Hillary Clinton, they forfeited their right to escape THE ESTABLISHMENT label, at least for now, by supporting her. If Bernie somehow pulls off the big upset and becomes the nominee of the Democratic Party, you will never hear those organizations referred to as being part of THE ESTABLISHMENT again.
It’s not so much that being part of THE ESTABLISHMENT in Bernie’s world is a bad thing (although I make no case that THE ESTABLISHMENT has been mistake-free), it’s the sinister context it takes on when Bernie mouths the words. His voice rises and his rasp increases a notch or two. Republicans take on a similar tone when they speak the word “socialism.” But despite his use of the label “Democratic Socialist,” Bernie is less Socialist and more Utopian in his view of the world.
The Democratic Party has spent the last 80 years or so trying to convince the fearful in America that being a Democrat is not the same as being a Socialist. Hint- it is not the number of times that you invoke Joe Hill each day. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Chair of the Democratic National Committee, was unable or unwilling to answer MSNBC’s Chris Matthews when he asked that exact question. Matthews was aghast. He thought it was the essential fact that socialists want the Government to control the means of production and Democrats pick and choose. I have seen Sanders interviewed a number of times (more than any member of THE ESTABLISHMENT should admit), and I have never heard any interviewer ask him whether he believes the Government should control all the means of production. Other than often invoking the virtues of Norway, Sanders has never hinted as much, to my best knowledge. His political agenda has pretty much been the boilerplate of the Left for all the years that I’ve followed politics.
Like the right wing in this country, people at the opposite end of the political spectrum see the world in terms of heroes and villains. The right sees America’s heroes as entrepreneurs such as Steve Jobs. The villains are big Government whose stifling regulations inhibit the business community from competing with the rest of the world. Sanders and his supporters see America’s heroes as the hardworking middle class and the villain as Wall Street. In the closing weeks of the Iowa campaign, Sanders seems to be expanding his enemies list to any group that supported his opponent. There seem to be no gray areas.
Washington’s political environment is toxic, so it is hard to understand how the non-establishment candidates in both parties can get their agendas enacted. Sanders harks back to the 1960s in his rhetoric by way of explanation. He believes that a political revolution will take place, that the working class will sort of throw off its chains, stick its collective head out of the window like the actor Peter Finch in “Broadcast News” and say, “We’re not going to take it anymore.” But “revolution” in the United States is a word often used as much in automobile commercials as politics. I often think of the cynicism underlying the opening line in the Beatles song “Revolution,” “You say you want a revolution, well, we all want to change the world.” I think to interpret the anger in America as a call for revolution is a misreading. Americans are calling for fairness and justice, which I think is a call for progressive change, not revolution.
Bernie’s message is resonating at the moment, but that message hasn’t really been tested in Iowa or New Hampshire, neither of which look much like America. In order to effect change in American politics, you don’t declare war against THE ESTABLISHMENT; you parliamentary horse trade (the one area where I may agree with Trump). A little nuance is needed. The villains on Wall Street are the ones who broke the laws. Tighten regulations and there will be fewer law breakers. Treating Wall Street and the big banks as villains only precludes making deals that leave Americans better off. Shrugging off long-standing progressive institutions by calling them part of THE ESTABLISHMENT in all likelihood means kissing off the general election.
Democrats want reality – you haven’t elected a liberal president in my lifetime since Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Republicans believe the myth of the Reagan revolution. Reagan raised taxes, ran budget deficits, negotiated with the Soviet Union. He wouldn’t be able to get a key to the restroom at the Union League today. ■
